[Poochie]

Originally Posted by VisualEcho

Something specifically wrong with the N55?

No, it's been good to me, not a single issue, not even the stock charge pipe blowing and I drive like it's stolen..

But I was referring specifically to the "S" engines..

You know the M2's N55 is considered the red-headed stepchild of the official M cars, so I guess it's the exception to this rule.

[VisualEcho]

Originally Posted by Poochie

You know the M2's N55 is considered the red-headed stepchild of the official M cars, so I guess it's the exception to this rule.

Yes, I've heard. And if I'm honest, I would have loved to have the S55, but with the issues, sound, and future maintenance, I'm overjoyed I got the N55.

[///AVM]

Originally Posted by Poochie

You know the M2's N55 is considered the red-headed stepchild of the official M cars.

But Poochie, you got those sweet M2 wheels and I have honestly never heard anyone with an M2 complain about the N55 . . .

///AVM

[Poochie]

Originally Posted by ///AVM

But Poochie, you got those sweet M2 wheels and I have honestly never heard anyone with an M2 complain about the N55 . . .

///AVM

You must of missed it but the debate over the M2 not being a "real" M car because of its "N" motor and not an "S" motor is legendary here, it died down after the M2C became the replacement but it was an entertaining pissing match.

And yes, I agree, the N55 is one potent motor, I one had 3 different cars and when my pedal is touching the floor, everyone and everything around me disappears..

I like to play mind games on the highway, when some chump tries to show off with his new Camry or Maxima, I let them get close, then step on it again and lose them is an oblivion, just to crush their self-esteem, with their little engine that could..

The N55 gets ups there with the best of them....

[AlpsRider]

I hadn't heard of the B58 burning that much oil...that would piss me off big time. My M2C S55 doesn't burn a drop of oil and neither did my M235i N55. Hopefully that will be addressed with the newer S58 models.

[///AVM]

Originally Posted by Poochie

You must of missed it but the debate over the M2 not being a "real" M car because of its "N" motor and not an "S" motor is legendary here, it died down after the M2C became the replacement but it was an entertaining pissing match.

Poochie

Yes, I must have come onto seen well after the N55 vs S55 was a hot debate.

In truth, I try to avoid that stuff anyway. Remember, I live in a world that will not let go of the NAF6 vs F4T debate . . . it is mindless and a never-ending ego pounding exercise.

Among the Cayman options, I tried all available at the time of my purchase interest. 981 GTS, 718 GTS and 981 GT4 . . . and one stood out head and toes above the rest, despite all the debates and ‘expert reviews’ to the contrary.

In a perfect world the NAF6 would perform like the F4T, as there are many aspects of NA engines I prefer over turbo engines. The prospect of the 718 GTS 4.0 will get some of my attention if/when available in PDK.

///AVM

[2020M2Competition]

Originally Posted by ///AVM

Poochie

I guess I do not get all of this Adaptive Suspension talk when it comes to the M2CS . . . why does BMW offer more suspension options (Comfort, Sport and Sport Plus) as the model becomes more track-focused?

I understand Adaptive Suspension represents more sophisticated and costly technology, and BMW needs to do something to TRY and justify the price of the M2CS.

Aside from not making sense to offer 'Comfort Mode' to a track focused car, doesn't the Adaptive Suspension add more weight over the M2C fixed suspension?

From what I have read on this forum by dedicated track enthusiasts, the suspension of choice seems to be fixed with coil-overs? Could be wrong, but that is the consensus impression I have gained.

Just out of curiosity, do you happen to know where the fixed M2C suspension falls on adaptive scale of Comfort <---> Sport Plus? I suspect I know the answer, just looking for confirmation.

Anyway I slice it, the M2C just keeps landing in the 2-series 'sweet spot.'

///AVM

Some more info for you

https://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1005164

"Which of the modes COMFORT, SPORT and SPORT PLUS of the Adaptive M suspension can the standard suspension best be compared to?

That's a relatively difficult question to answer. Due to the elaborate regulation logic and sensor system, the Adaptive M suspension is able to achieve superstructure cohesion and increased comfort at the same time. This is usually the conflict you always have with the suspension set-up: achieving the best possible cohesion so as to be able to run on demanding tracks like the Nürburgring Nordschleife as fast as possible, for example - but also retaining the required amount of comfort for everyday driving. The car mustn't demonstrate any after-response or pumping, let alone take off over hollows and crests. In terms of superstructure cohesion, the standard suspension is somewhere between SPORT and SPORT PLUS, in terms of comfort it is more equivalent to SPORT PLUS."

[///AVM]

Been meaning to say this for a while, and now seems as good a time as any . . .

This is a damn good forum. In an online world where dipshits are everywhere, this forum is about as cordial and enjoyable as they come.

The Bimmerpost IT folks have built the best website I have come across to date, and the iPhone app is even more amazing.

I enjoy the topics and exchanges, particularly during these relatively idle times.

All of this coming from a guy who does not even currently own a BMW.

///AVM

[BigKutta]

Originally Posted by ///AVM

Been meaning to say this for a while, and now seems as good a time as any . . .

This is a damn good forum. In an online world where dipshits are everywhere, this forum is about as cordial and enjoyable as they come.

The Bimmerpost IT folks have built the best website I have come across to date, and the iPhone app is even more amazing.

I enjoy the topics and exchanges, particularly during these relatively idle times.

All of this coming from a guy who does not even currently own a BMW.

///AVM

I have to agree that the app is pretty great. This is the only forum I also use the app for, and it's even better for posting pictures right from the phone because its easy and the pic come out oriented correctly!

[Poochie]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

I hadn't heard of the B58 burning that much oil...that would piss me off big time. My M2C S55 doesn't burn a drop of oil and neither did my M235i N55. Hopefully that will be addressed with the newer S58 models.

If you look over the thread, there are enough owner complaints about excessive oil burning to probably file a Class Action suit against BMW.

This seems to be unique to the revised TÜ1 version of the B58, which is in the M340i and Z4 40i, specifically.

I haven't been able to confirm if this is also common on the first generation B58 also, however there is no indication that it is.

[AlpsRider]

There's always something, right? I've pretty much decided that the spun crank hub issue with the S55 is overblown if you are stage 1 or less. So I'm not even going to think about it until the warranty is up.

[Madmat]

[/QUOTE]

...The N55 gets ups there with the best of them.... [/QUOTE]

Jajajajajajaj that meme is just awesome

[///AVM]

Here is an idea for BMW engineers . . . stop making the engines ‘bigger’ and start making the cars lighter.

The M2C is noticeably ‘heavy’ when driving. Yes, the S55 is has plenty of oomph to move the approximate 3600 lbs, but the weight of the car still comes through in the feel of chassis handling, braking and overall performance.

I never calculated the power:weight ratio for my 718 CGTS to that of the M2C, but my suspicion is they are similar. Yes, the GTS has a different chassis and a mid-engine mount, but I think there is more to it than that when comparing the ‘handling’ performance between the two cars. . . the ‘more’ is the fact that the M2C weighs a quarter ton-plus more than the GTS.

I get that the M2C has a back seat, BUT so do the larger M3/4 chassis. . . yet, the latter only weigh 25-30 lbs more than the smaller M2C. Regarding the M2CS, I think the single biggest ball dropped by BMW is that they could not achieve any significant weight reduction compared to the M2C. Drop a couple hundred pounds and I would anticipate some meaningful performance improvement.

Poochie, I was prompted to make this post because (1) I have too much idle time on my hands during the current times; and (2) in response to your owning an N55 M2 and interest in the next M2 iteration with S58 engine. BMW can keep adding more powerful engines to bigger cars, but less engine with less weight adds up to a better performance than proportionately more engine and more weight. The power:weight ratio is not 1:1 when it comes overall chassis performance.

How does BMW make the next iteration of the M2 lighter? Well, it should not be very hard to drop 200-300 meaningful pounds. After all, the 2-series chassis is the smallest in the BMW lineup. Just make it a little but smaller and nobody will care about slightly smaller dimensions when compared to performance gained.

What does this have to do with the 21’ M2C release? Nothing other than my sneaking suspicion that the next M2C release will come in 2023 with an S58 engine. . . and, hopefully, a significant weight loss?

///AVM

https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1520635

[Poochie]

Originally Posted by ///AVM

How does BMW make the next iteration of the M2 lighter? Well, it should not be very hard to drop 200-300 meaningful pounds. After all, the 2-series chassis is the smallest in the BMW lineup. Just make it a little but smaller and nobody will care about slightly smaller dimensions when compared to performance gained.

Cars nowadays are not heavier because they want it that way or they don't understand how power-to-weight ratio is skewed, it's because of a balance in modern vehicle crash safety requirements and keeping the cost down.

By law, modern vehicles are required to be fitted with a variety of safety-oriented technology (anti-lock brakes, stability control and tire-pressure-monitoring systems, etc.).

Since then, automobiles have gradually packed on the pounds — negatively offsetting the technology encouraging fuel frugality. Modern safety concerns, improved build quality, sound dampening, and consumer demand for bigness have all helped to keep the typical family transport oinking around a two-ton curb weight.

If companies could effectively slim down those autos, without sacrificing structural rigidity, safety, or consumer comfort, the efficiency gains would become all the more significant. However, with few consumers ready to dive back into noisy, frail hatchbacks, weight savings will likely need to be done on the molecular level.

In theory, they could use more exotic, lightweight materials like carbon fiber, aluminum or magnesium to drive down the overall weight but it will effectively increase the MSRPs, which would be a whole other discussion.

Check out this thread below, BMW's new standardize production platform CLAR to reduce weight in the M340i was offset by the added amenities, so they are right back where they started, with a porky car, even though it's technically lighter.


M340i Weight Increase https://g20.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1599263

[///AVM]

Originally Posted by Poochie

Cars nowadays are not heavier because they want it that way or they don't understand how power-to-weight ratio is skewed, it's because of a balance in modern vehicle crash safety requirements and keeping the cost down.

By law, modern vehicles are required to be fitted with a variety of safety-oriented technology (anti-lock brakes, stability control and tire-pressure-monitoring systems, etc.).

Since then, automobiles have gradually packed on the pounds — negatively offsetting the technology encouraging fuel frugality. Modern safety concerns, improved build quality, sound dampening, and consumer demand for bigness have all helped to keep the typical family transport oinking around a two-ton curb weight.

If companies could effectively slim down those autos, without sacrificing structural rigidity, safety, or consumer comfort, the efficiency gains would become all the more significant. However, with few consumers ready to dive back into noisy, frail hatchbacks, weight savings will likely need to be done on the molecular level.

In theory, they could use more exotic, lightweight materials like carbon fiber, aluminum or magnesium to drive down the overall weight but will drive up the prices, which would a whole other discussion.

Check out this thread below, BMW's new standardize production platform CLAR to reduce weight in the M340i was offset by the added amenities, so they are right back where they started, with a porky car, even though it's technically lighter.


M340i Weight Increase https://g20.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1599263

Poochie

Couldn't they just make the M2 smaller?

I say that, but that still doesn't explain why the M2C and M3/4 weigh essentially the same?

At any rate, as always, another great post on your part.

///AVM

[Poochie]

Originally Posted by ///AVM

Poochie

Couldn't they just make the M2 smaller?

I say that, but that still doesn't explain why the M2C and M3/4 weigh essentially the same?

At any rate, as always, another great post on your part.

///AVM

I don't believe that would make much of a difference, my 135i & Mini Cooper JCW was little cute, bite-size cars and they still weighed a substantial amount. Like they say, It's what it is..

This manual 135i with a sunroof was 3,300lbs:

[Moflow]

Originally Posted by ///AVM

Here is an idea for BMW engineers . . . stop making the engines ‘bigger’ and start making the cars lighter.

The M2C is noticeably ‘heavy’ when driving. Yes, the S55 is has plenty of oomph to move the approximate 3600 lbs, but the weight of the car still comes through in the feel of chassis handling, braking and overall performance.

I never calculated the power:weight ratio for my 718 CGTS to that of the M2C, but my suspicion is they are similar. Yes, the GTS has a different chassis and a mid-engine mount, but I think there is more to it than that when comparing the ‘handling’ performance between the two cars. . . the ‘more’ is the fact that the M2C weighs a quarter ton-plus more than the GTS.

I get that the M2C has a back seat, BUT so do the larger M3/4 chassis. . . yet, the latter only weigh 25-30 lbs more than the smaller M2C. Regarding the M2CS, I think the single biggest ball dropped by BMW is that they could not achieve any significant weight reduction compared to the M2C. Drop a couple hundred pounds and I would anticipate some meaningful performance improvement.

Poochie, I was prompted to make this post because (1) I have too much idle time on my hands during the current times; and (2) in response to your owning an N55 M2 and interest in the next M2 iteration with S58 engine. BMW can keep adding more powerful engines to bigger cars, but less engine with less weight adds up to a better performance than proportionately more engine and more weight. The power:weight ratio is not 1:1 when it comes overall chassis performance.

How does BMW make the next iteration of the M2 lighter? Well, it should not be very hard to drop 200-300 meaningful pounds. After all, the 2-series chassis is the smallest in the BMW lineup. Just make it a little but smaller and nobody will care about slightly smaller dimensions when compared to performance gained.

What does this have to do with the 21’ M2C release? Nothing other than my sneaking suspicion that the next M2C release will come in 2023 with an S58 engine. . . and, hopefully, a significant weight loss?

///AVM

https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1520635

The problem is that the vast majority of 2-series cars that get sold are not M2s. BMW doesn’t want to compromise a thing on those cars, in order to make the M2 better. I believe the M3/M4 achieve a lot of that weight reduction thanks to exotic materials, which drive up the price of the car. Since the M2 is the cheap M car, BMW don’t want to go that route either.

Sadly (for us, not you) that’s the advantage of a dedicated sports car chassis. Nobody at Porsche is worried about people in base boxsters complaining about how impractical the car is. Nobody buys anything on that chassis without thinking about performance first and foremost. The trade off is that our back seats are really actually quite big, as is the trunk. The M2 also gets basically every convenience option as standard, since it’s being built and billed as the ultimate 2-series. And overall the car ends up cheaper. When I priced out a cayman, the base price was a little cheaper than the M2c, but with kind of the minimum options I’d want, it was more expensive. The S was out of my price range.

Definitely a “pick your poison” scenario. But I think you’re pointing out an important fact, which is that performance cars benefit massively from being on their own chassis when it comes to actual performance car stuff.

[///AVM]

Originally Posted by Poochie

This manual 135i with a sunroof was 3,300lbs:

Poochie

I guess there is a reason why I never disagree with you or, at least, argue if I do

That 135i actually looks to my eye about the same size as the M2 and has a sunroof. . . yet some 300 lbs lighter than the M2C (and, from what I looked up, about 150 lbs lighter than the M2).

So, as you indicate, component parts add up over time.

///AVM

[///AVM]

Originally Posted by Moflow

But I think you’re pointing out an important fact, which is that performance cars benefit massively from being on their own chassis when it comes to actual performance car stuff.

Fantastic Mo!

I have to occasionally bite my tongue, depending on the company I keep. . . but I do have perspective that Porsche builds sport cars and BMW sporty cars.

This is absolutely no dig at either manufacturer, rather, I believe in keeping with your beautiful summary of fact that Porsche and BMW are targeting different audiences and sales volume goals.

There is, of course, some consumer overlap when it comes to the 718/911 and M2/3/4 makes and models. Hence, why I find Bimmerpost my forum of choice as a current Porsche owner.

///AVM

[medphysdave]

Originally Posted by ///AVM

Fantastic Mo!

I have to occasionally bite my tongue, depending on the company I keep. . . but I do have perspective that Porsche builds sport cars and BMW sporty cars.

This is absolutely no dig at either manufacturer, rather, I believe in keeping with your beautiful summary of fact that Porsche and BMW are targeting different audiences and sales volume goals.

There is, of course, some consumer overlap when it comes to the 718/911 and M2/3/4 makes and models. Hence, why I find Bimmerpost my forum of choice as a current Porsche owner.

///AVM

^^^THIS. It's why all the debate is so much fun. Most of the time the arguments are based upon the individual's needs so they are in fact right about their argument. Sport vs sporty. Pick your poison. There is indeed some overlap, but superiority lands with the targeted need.

[///AVM]

Originally Posted by medphysdave

^^^THIS. It's why all the debate is so much fun. Most of the time the arguments are based upon the individual's needs so they are in fact right about their argument. Sport vs sporty. Pick your poison. There is indeed some overlap, but superiority lands with the targeted need.

[xxyion]

To add to this, i'm curious if all the reasons posted is actually totally true. If you look at some cars out now like the 86 or the Miata, those cars are able to achieve the light weight aspect while keeping up with modern safety measures.

I thought maybe those cars might still be too small however with word of peopl stuffing in LS engines in both of those cars i dont see much of an issue there. Those cars are also around 30k cheaper than the M2C, so if you threw 30k back in for a better interior as well as it being engineered a bit better to make the engine and cooling fit, you might be able to achieve something along the lines of a 3100 lb sports car. That 500 lbs in weight savings would go a LONG way in improving performance and overal speed times.


Now i'm no engineer so theres probably a lot that i'm missing. But i dont really think Safety and creature comforts are the main reason why these cars are so heavy.